RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Pharmaceutical industry exposure is widespread during medical training and may affect education and clinical decision-making. Medical faculties' conflict of interest (COI) policies help to limit this exposure and protect students against commercial influence. AIMS: Our aim was to investigate the prevalence, content and strength of COI policies at Australian medical schools and changes since a previous assessment conducted in 2009. METHODS: We identified policies by searching medical school and host university websites in January 2021, and contacted deans to identify any missed policies. We applied a modified version of a scorecard developed in previous studies to examine the content of COI policies. All data were coded in duplicate. COI policies were rated on a scale from 0 (no policy) to 2 (strong policy) across 11 items per medical school. Oversight mechanisms and sanctions were also assessed, and current policies were compared with the 2009 study. RESULTS: Of 155 potentially relevant policies, 153 were university-wide and two were specific to medical schools. No policies covered sales representatives, on-site sponsored education or free samples. Oversight of consultancies had improved substantially, with 76% of schools requiring preapproval. Disclosure policies, while usually present, were weak, with no public disclosure required. CONCLUSION: We found little indication that Australian medical students are protected from commercial influence on medical education, and there has been limited COI policy development within the past decade. More attention is needed to ensure the independence of medical education in Australia.
Asunto(s)
Conflicto de Intereses , Facultades de Medicina , Humanos , Australia , Revelación , PolíticasRESUMEN
OBJECTIVE: We developed a clinical tool comprising patient risk factors for having an abnormal calcium (Ca), magnesium (Mg) or phosphate (PO4) level. We hypothesized that patients without a risk factor do not require testing. This study examined the tool's potential utility for rationalizing Ca, Mg and PO4 ordering in the emergency department (ED). METHODS: We undertook a retrospective observational study in a single metropolitan ED. Patients aged 18 years or more who presented between July and December 2019 were included if they had a Ca, Mg or PO4 test during their ED stay. Demographic and clinical data, including the presence of risk factors, were extracted from the medical record. The primary outcome was a clinically significant abnormal Ca, Mg or PO4 level (>0.2 mmol/l above or below the laboratory reference range). RESULTS: Calcium, Mg and PO4 levels were measured on 1426, 1296 and 1099 patients, respectively. The positive and negative predictive values and likelihood ratios of the tool identifying a patient with a Ca level > 0.2 mmol/l outside the range were 0.05, 0.99, 1.59 and 0.41, respectively. The values for Mg were 0.02, 1.00, 1.44 and 0.35 and those for PO4 were 0.15, 0.93, 1.38 and 0.57, respectively. The majority of patients not identified as having an abnormal level did not receive electrolyte correction treatment. Application of the tool would have resulted in a 35.8% cost reduction. CONCLUSION: The tool failed to predict a very small proportion of patients (approximately 1%) with an abnormal Ca or Mg level and for whom it would have been desirable to have these levels measured. It may help rationalize Ca and Mg ordering and reduce laboratory costs.
Asunto(s)
Calcio , Magnesio , Adolescente , Servicio de Urgencia en Hospital , Humanos , Fosfatos , Estudios RetrospectivosRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: To compare the clinical and demographic variables of patients who present to the ED at different times of the day in order to determine the nature and extent of potential selection bias inherent in convenience sampling METHODS: We undertook a retrospective, observational study of data routinely collected in five EDs in 2019. Adult patients (aged ≥18 years) who presented with abdominal or chest pain, headache or dyspnoea were enrolled. For each patient group, the discharge diagnoses (primary outcome) of patients who presented during the day (08:00-15:59), evening (16:00-23:59), and night (00:00-07:59) were compared. Demographics, triage category and pain score, and initial vital signs were also compared. RESULTS: 2500 patients were enrolled in each of the four patient groups. For patients with abdominal pain, the diagnoses differed significantly across the time periods (p<0.001) with greater proportions of unspecified/unknown cause diagnoses in the evening (47.4%) compared with the morning (41.7%). For patients with chest pain, heart rate differed (p<0.001) with a mean rate higher in the evening (80 beats/minute) than at night (76). For patients with headache, mean patient age differed (p=0.004) with a greater age in the daytime (46 years) than the evening (41). For patients with dyspnoea, discharge diagnoses differed (p<0.001). Asthma diagnoses were more common at night (12.6%) than during the daytime (7.5%). For patients with dyspnoea, there were also differences in gender distribution (p=0.003), age (p<0.001) and respiratory rates (p=0.003) across the time periods. For each patient group, the departure status differed across the time periods (p<0.001). CONCLUSION: Patients with abdominal or chest pain, headache or dyspnoea differ in a range of clinical and demographic variables depending upon their time of presentation. These differences may potentially introduce selection bias impacting upon the internal validity of a study if convenience sampling of patients is undertaken.
Asunto(s)
Dolor en el Pecho , Servicio de Urgencia en Hospital , Adolescente , Adulto , Dolor en el Pecho/diagnóstico , Dolor en el Pecho/etiología , Humanos , Persona de Mediana Edad , Estudios Retrospectivos , Sesgo de Selección , TriajeRESUMEN
OBJECTIVE: To determine author and journal self-citation rates in a sample of original emergency medicine (EM) research articles. METHODS: We undertook a retrospective observational study of original research articles published in 2019 in the top six English language general EM journals. Data comprised the total numbers of articles, citations, authors and self-citations for each author (author self-citations) as well as the number of articles in the reference list that had been previously published in the same journal (journal self-citations). RESULTS: 3213 individual authors and 581 articles were examined. Most authors did not self-cite at all although 62 self-cited five or more times in a single article. The mean (SD) and median (IQR) numbers of individual author self-citations/article/year were 0.6 (1.3) and 0 (0-1), respectively. Overall, author self-citations accounted for 2.4% of all cited articles. There was a weak positive but significant correlation between the number of individual author self-citations/article/year and the number of articles published by the author (r = 0.38, p < 0.001). There was no correlation between the journal impact factor (IF) and the author self-citation rate (r = 0.14, p = 0.79). The journals differed significantly in their author self-citation rates (p < 0.001). Annals of Emergency Medicine had the highest journal self-citation rate at 8.1% (95%CI 7.0%-9.2%) self-citations/100 citations/year, almost twice that of some other journals. There was a large but non-significant positive correlation between the journal IF and journal self-citation rates (r = 0.78, p = 0.07). CONCLUSION: Both author and journal self-citation rates in the articles examined are relatively low compared to other medical and scientific disciplines.
Asunto(s)
Bibliometría , Medicina de Emergencia , Autoria , Humanos , Factor de Impacto de la Revista , Edición , Estudios RetrospectivosRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: We aimed to determine the incidence, nature of and predisposing factors for risk events (REs) that occur during the intrahospital transport of patients from the ED. METHODS: We undertook a prospective, observational study of intrahospital patient transports from a single ED between 30 January and 20 March 2020. An investigator attended each transport and recorded any RE on a specifically designed data collection document. An RE was any mishap, even if not foreseen, that had the potential to cause the patient harm. A patient equipment number was assigned based on the number of pieces of equipment required during the transport. Poisson regression generated incidence rate ratios (IRRs) and determined risk factors for REs. RESULTS: Of 738 transports, 289 (39.1%, 95% CI 35.6% to 42.8%) had at least one RE. The total of 521 REs comprised 125 patient-related, 279 device-related and 117 line/catheter-related REs. The most common included trolley collisions (n=142), intravenous fluid line catching/tangling (n=93), agitation/aggression events (n=31) and cardiac monitoring issues (n=31). Thirty-four (6.5%) REs resulted in an undesirable patient outcome, most commonly distress and pain. Predisposing factors for REs included an equipment number ≥3 (IRR 5.68, 95% CI 3.95 to 8.17), transport to a general ward (IRR 2.68, 95% CI 2.12 to 3.39), hypertension (IRR 1.93, 95% CI 1.07 to 3.50), an abnormal temperature and a GCS<14. CONCLUSIONS: REs are common in transport of patients from the ED and can result in undesirable patient outcomes. Adequate pre-transfer preparation, especially securing equipment and lines, would result in a reduced risk.